Mark Shea and Simcha Fisher Fired from National Catholic Register

[pensmama87]

His political writing were on his blog at Patheos though.

Simcha, supposedly wrote something overly risque’ on her own facebook page.

Her blogs on National Catholic Register and her personal one were non political, general mommy blogging. She had a feature on preparing meals for many children. She talked about NFP. She’s discussed her struggles with post partum depression. She discussed her struggle with her mom with Alzheimer’s.

I like her and found her personable.

I agree.

Frankly, I think the people who are out to get her in particular are really uptight. And yes, there was a recent “hit piece” on Mrs. Fisher that deliberately twisted several of her personal Facebook posts and made them seem worse than they were. I’m not going to link to it because it was vile and the author doesn’t deserve hits, but it’s easily searchable if you’d like. It also insulted her several times because of her family’s former poverty.

One of the most common criticisms of Catholics (from the secular world) is that they are puritanical. This would be laughable in almost any other period in human history. As I said, she’s a mom of ten. Body humor is part of family life. She’s open about the fact that she enjoys all of the aspects of family life including marital life. Occasionally it may be crude, but it’s nothing my husband and I haven’t said to each other or to friends who “get it.” I could see an employer saying, “Hey, maybe make your Facebook a little less public,” but firing is crazy. She’s said nothing contrary to the Faith and doesn’t engage in the same kind of nastiness people say about her and her family.

I can’t say the same for Mr. Shea because I don’t read him as much now (I don’t dispute that he could be angry and uncharitable toward others - interestingly, flaws he frequently admits and apologizes for, which is almost unheard of by other writers, including those who are his most vocal critics). But I think it’ll end up being a misstep by the Register. They lost me as a reader and as far as I can tell, I’m far from the only one.

 

[steido01]

There are also numerous comments in the New Testament about not using vulgarity.

Indeed. And I’m not saying I’m a particular fan of vulgarity myself.

Having said that, and having only read of this as of this morning, I think the problem goes beyond mere vulgarity. It’s one thing to be scatological. It’s another to compare the symbol used by one of the two major candidates to being a cross between a swastika and an act between male and female that can be rather morally problematic in some circumstances, and would be in the way it was casually mentioned.

To be fair, many people - even some Trump supporters - acknowledged that the logo looked… well, pornographic. There’s a reason it was replaced. To fault someone for their criticism of a logo when they clearly weren’t the only one to see something offensive in it seems petty - especially when that someone is paid for their opinions. If we begin firing those who disagree with us, pretty soon we’re just paying to hear our own opinions.

If you have a writer who writes from a female prospective, and from the prospective of a mother of several children, making causal references to an act that of that type, you’ve skated on to thin ice. Once a person mentions an act, it’s generally presumed they are familiar with it. Indeed, if you aren’t familiar with it, how would you know something looked like it?

Surely, you see the fault in this line of reasoning, yes?

It’s not necessarily the case that this causes a moral problem, but in order to explain the morality of it, you’re explaining something that’s pretty graphic. And at that point, you are probably where you don’t need to be as a columnist in her context. Going there was really foolish on her part and she inevitably lost credit as a result.

I think this is likely a symptom of the degree to which public discourse is in the dumps in this country. But, given what she said, I don’t know that the NCR had much of a choice. In their place, I might have done the same. Having said that, I wish she’d been retained.

You’re probably correct in your diagnosis of the greater culture. What I find most astonishing is that it’s largely Trump-supporters who are gleefully applauding the guillotining of Mark and Simcha, while glossing over the countless racist, misogynistic, bigoted remarks of their own man. Ok when it’s done by their man, but no one else can do anything remotely --and I use that term in the broadest construction possible-- close.

 

[Usige]

His political writing were on his blog at Patheos though.

Simcha, supposedly wrote something overly risque’ on her own facebook page.

Her blogs on National Catholic Register and her personal one were non political, general mommy blogging. She had a feature on preparing meals for many children. She talked about NFP. She’s discussed her struggles with post partum depression. She discussed her struggle with her mom with Alzheimer’s.

I like her and found her personable.

Her personal blogs and other social media also identified her as a writer for NCR. Even if the more offensive posts or comments were not published on NCR, she clearly associates herself with them as an orginzation. Her actions and choice of phrasing certainly reflects on them. If she, or any other author, reflects an image inconsistent with a media outlets purpose they have no reason to keep them. That does not mean the author is bad, but simply not a good fit for that publication.

 

[steido01]

I agree.

Frankly, I think the people who are out to get her in particular are really uptight. And yes, there was a recent “hit piece” on Mrs. Fisher that deliberately twisted several of her personal Facebook posts and made them seem worse than they were. I’m not going to link to it because it was vile and the author doesn’t deserve hits, but it’s easily searchable if you’d like. It also insulted her several times because of her family’s former poverty.

One of the most common criticisms of Catholics (from the secular world) is that they are puritanical. This would be laughable in almost any other period in human history. As I said, she’s a mom of ten. Body humor is part of family life. She’s open about the fact that she enjoys all of the aspects of family life including marital life. Occasionally it may be crude, but it’s nothing my husband and I haven’t said to each other or to friends who “get it.” I could see an employer saying, “Hey, maybe make your Facebook a little less public,” but firing is crazy. She’s said nothing contrary to the Faith and doesn’t engage in the same kind of nastiness people say about her and her family.

I can’t say the same for Mr. Shea because I don’t read him as much now (I don’t dispute that he could be angry and uncharitable toward others - interestingly, flaws he frequently admits and apologizes for, which is almost unheard of by other writers, including those who are his most vocal critics). But I think it’ll end up being a misstep by the Register. They lost me as a reader and as far as I can tell, I’m far from the only one.

I grew up with five older sisters, a younger brother, and as many foster children as our means allowed us to care for. Now my wife and I already have two of our own. As someone who, like Mr.s Fisher, understands what it’s like to live in a real family –

 

[didymus]

Shouldn’t writers, thinkers, artists, and all others who are paid to, essentially, *think *be free to do so without being censored? Seems to be the nature of the medium. It requires the freedom to speak.

Free to think and write, yes, to get paid, no.
I quit reading Shea’s blog a couple years ago and even at that time he posted apologies confessing, “I’ve been an a–h—”. True enough but he should have learned and stopped behaving like one.
Shea brooks no charity for anyone who disagrees with him and appears to think conservatives are the root of all evil. What really drove me over the edge about him was his constant use of the liberal “you only care about unborn babies!” to club those who think the war in Iraq, the bombing of Hiroshima/Nagasaki, the death penalty, &c are justified or at least ambiguous.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

I agree.

Frankly, I think the people who are out to get her in particular are really uptight. And yes, there was a recent “hit piece” on Mrs. Fisher that deliberately twisted several of her personal Facebook posts and made them seem worse than they were. I’m not going to link to it because it was vile and the author doesn’t deserve hits, but it’s easily searchable if you’d like. It also insulted her several times because of her family’s former poverty.

One of the most common criticisms of Catholics (from the secular world) is that they are puritanical. This would be laughable in almost any other period in human history. As I said, she’s a mom of ten. Body humor is part of family life. She’s open about the fact that she enjoys all of the aspects of family life including marital life. Occasionally it may be crude, but it’s nothing my husband and I haven’t said to each other or to friends who “get it.” I could see an employer saying, “Hey, maybe make your Facebook a little less public,” but firing is crazy. She’s said nothing contrary to the Faith and doesn’t engage in the same kind of nastiness people say about her and her family.

I can’t say the same for Mr. Shea because I don’t read him as much now (I don’t dispute that he could be angry and uncharitable toward others - interestingly, flaws he frequently admits and apologizes for, which is almost unheard of by other writers, including those who are his most vocal critics). But I think it’ll end up being a misstep by the Register. They lost me as a reader and as far as I can tell, I’m far from the only one.

I’m pretty sure I saw that last night. And I did see personal insults about Simcha that were terrible.

I don’t have Facebook, so I wouldn’t have known about any vulgarity unless it was brought up last night in various screen grabs on twitter.

 

[Usige]

Shouldn’t writers, thinkers, artists, and all others who are paid to, essentially, *think *be free to do so without being censored? Seems to be the nature of the medium. It requires the freedom to speak.

A publication that pays them is under no obligation to continue to pay them if the person harms their purpose for existing. Some people liked NCR for Mrs Fisher and Mr Shea. Others didn’t. The editors have to make a decision if a particular author is helping or harming them. It is possible to raise points of disagreement without resorting to sophomoric humor or being overly acrid. If that communication style works for a publication then more power to them, but if it causes numerous complaints then a publisher is well within their rights to ask them to moderate their tone or sever the relationship.

 

[Yeoman]

His political writing were on his blog at Patheos though.

Simcha, supposedly wrote something overly risque’ on her own facebook page.

Her blogs on National Catholic Register and her personal one were non political, general mommy blogging. She had a feature on preparing meals for many children. She talked about NFP. She’s discussed her struggles with post partum depression. She discussed her struggle with her mom with Alzheimer’s.

I like her and found her personable.

The problem for any writer is that its not really possible to separate your writings by publisher. So, you can wholly avoid one thing in a journal, but write about it on a blog, but it’s all out there and the second its published, it’s a problem for anyone who publishes you.

And that’s probably the way it should be. A person’s opinions are not bifurcated in reality and anyone who publishes them will be associated, in some ways, with them.

 

[Yeoman]

Shouldn’t writers, thinkers, artists, and all others who are paid to, essentially, *think *be free to do so without being censored? Seems to be the nature of the medium. It requires the freedom to speak.

Indeed, they should be.

And publishers are free to publish those who they feel comfortable with and whom they feel reflect their views.

Just because a person writes doesn’t given him a write to be published. The publisher holds that right.

 

[Yeoman]

You’re probably correct in your diagnosis of the greater culture. What I find most astonishing is that it’s largely Trump-supporters who are gleefully applauding the guillotining of Mark and Simcha, while glossing over the countless racist, misogynistic, bigoted remarks of their own man. Ok when it’s done by their man, but no one else can do anything remotely --and I use that term in the broadest construction possible-- close.

Indeed, this general election descends to being the most pathetic in all senses in living memory, and I can remember at least back to 1972’s election.

I’d post further on my view that this year presents an opportunity to explore third parties, at least in non swing states, but I get the sense that this violates the rules of the forum and would be cut out. So I will keep that limited to that. In swing states, voters are presented with two really bad choices and must make the moral one, in my view. And by that, I mean the least morally objectionable view. In other states, however, I think that Catholics and others who take moral issues seriously, and maybe just politics in general seriously, have the opportunity to explore parties and candidates who are not tainted by the decay of the two party system we have in the US by default, but not by design.

 

[gracepoole]

I think it’s a genuine toss-up as to whether they were fired because of their social media personas (which, in the case of Shea, was VERY well known before he was a Register writer) or because they didn’t toe the party line re: the election. My guess is that their comments on Facebook and Twitter provided a convenient excuse to sack them. Disrupting the status quo pro-life narrative, for example, probably doesn’t sit well with NCRegister’s financial backers… There’s no diversity of Catholic opinions over there anymore. They’ve removed all traces of salt and now it’s simply bland, flavorless blah they’re serving up.

What I find amazing is this: people are offended by the vulgarity and “colorfulness” used by Fisher and Shea. Yet they dismiss this same sort of behavior in the presidential candidate for whom they’re voting. They express disgust at any sexual references made by these writers but disregard Trump’s comments about a “nice piece of ***”. There’s some kind of schizophrenic disconnect going on there.

 

[tapiocapudding]

I feel bad for both. Probably worse for Simcha.

I follow both.

I totally can relate to Mark’s POV. I can understand his frustration in these times.

The vitriol I witnessed last night on Twitter and other blogs though was horrible. Catholics should not be calling Simcha names. Catholics should not be criticizing Simcha because she bought a steak on food stamps .

Terrible!!

I agree completely. I saw the hit piece on her and it was vile, inaccurate and wildly out of context. I think Catholics do well to avoid falling into the same puritanical trap as the strict protestants. To suggest a few bawdy comments on her personal social media invites firing implies that Catholics should adhere to the same rigid way of conducting ourselves and never tell a fart joke. Is that who we want to be?

I agree.

Frankly, I think the people who are out to get her in particular are really uptight. And yes, there was a recent “hit piece” on Mrs. Fisher that deliberately twisted several of her personal Facebook posts and made them seem worse than they were. I’m not going to link to it because it was vile and the author doesn’t deserve hits, but it’s easily searchable if you’d like. It also insulted her several times because of her family’s former poverty.

One of the most common criticisms of Catholics (from the secular world) is that they are puritanical. This would be laughable in almost any other period in human history. As I said, she’s a mom of ten. Body humor is part of family life. She’s open about the fact that she enjoys all of the aspects of family life including marital life. Occasionally it may be crude, but it’s nothing my husband and I haven’t said to each other or to friends who “get it.” I could see an employer saying, “Hey, maybe make your Facebook a little less public,” but firing is crazy. She’s said nothing contrary to the Faith and doesn’t engage in the same kind of nastiness people say about her and her family.

I can’t say the same for Mr. Shea because I don’t read him as much now (I don’t dispute that he could be angry and uncharitable toward others - interestingly, flaws he frequently admits and apologizes for, which is almost unheard of by other writers, including those who are his most vocal critics). But I think it’ll end up being a misstep by the Register. They lost me as a reader and as far as I can tell, I’m far from the only one.

I completely agree with all of this.

I’m a fan of both of their writings, and they were the only reason I read the Register)

This is the case for me as well and I’ve written to the editor stating as much.

 

[Yeoman]

I think it’s a genuine toss-up as to whether they were fired because of their social media personas (which, in the case of Shea, was VERY well known before he was a Register writer) or because they didn’t toe the party line re: the election. My guess is that their comments on Facebook and Twitter provided a convenient excuse to sack them. Disrupting the status quo pro-life narrative, for example, probably doesn’t sit well with NCRegister’s financial backers… There’s no diversity of Catholic opinions over there anymore. They’ve removed all traces of salt and now it’s simply bland, flavorless blah they’re serving up.

As somebody who rarely reads the NCR ,and who almost never read Shea but who often, when checking in there, read Fisher, I’m coming from the outside on this.

So, I frankly find no surprise in why the NCR canned Shea. I’m not hugely familiar with what Fisher was generally saying, but the one item I saw her quoted on would have caused me to at least rebuke her for language in context. And I haven’t exactly lived a sheltered life and I’m hardly surrounded by all Catholics. It’s one item (that I read) but people will judge us as a group by what we say to at least some extent. I hope they hire her back, however.

Anyhow, I’m posting here because we need to be careful about our own accusations. It’s clear what Shea said and has been urging. It seems clear about what Fisher said and received this for. But what evidence does anyone have that the NCR had ulterior motives? When we talk of the NCR’s “financial backers” do we imagine there to be really substantial backers of the NCR? If we do, why would we believe that, and why would we believe that they’re pulling strings or offended, or risk being offended? That seems rather unlikely to me.

I think it’s likely an editorial determination and nothing else.

 

[Joe_5859]

A publication that pays them is under no obligation to continue to pay them if the person harms their purpose for existing. Some people liked NCR for Mrs Fisher and Mr Shea. Others didn’t. The editors have to make a decision if a particular author is helping or harming them. It is possible to raise points of disagreement without resorting to sophomoric humor or being overly acrid. If that communication style works for a publication then more power to them, but if it causes numerous complaints then a publisher is well within their rights to ask them to moderate their tone or sever the relationship.

Right.

Most of the time I read Shea or Fisher, it was through links on NewAdvent. Sometimes it would be to articles on NCRegister, other times it would be to their personal blog. So I’m sure I’ll still read things by them, just in different places.

I guess I’m equally baffled by those on the one hand who rejoice at the firing of another and those on the other who seem to think NCRegister owes Shea and Fisher a writing gig in perpetuity. I thought Mark Shea was very gracious in his blog post regarding his own firing, Less so in the post about Fisher. But I get that. It sometimes easier to let it go when we are the one’s suffering rather than our friends.

 

[Joe_5859]

I think it’s likely an editorial determination and nothing else.

Indeed. No grand conspiracy is necessary.

 

[PietroPaolo]

Shouldn’t writers, thinkers, artists, and all others who are paid to, essentially, *think *be free to do so without being censored? Seems to be the nature of the medium. It requires the freedom to speak.

That depends on who’s paying them. It isn’t incumbent upon the National Catholic Register to provide him money and a platform to do so.

 

[PietroPaolo]

I wonder if Fisher and Shea hadn’t been warned by the Register that if they persisted in their vulgar speech and or vitriol that they would be removed. If so, Shea and Fisher continued at their own risk. I’d like to see a better statement from National Catholic Register before sounding off too much

 

[Yeoman]

Right.

Most of the time I read Shea or Fisher, it was through links on NewAdvent. Sometimes it would be to articles on NCRegister, other times it would be to their personal blog. So I’m sure I’ll still read things by them, just in different places.

I guess I’m equally baffled by those on the one hand who rejoice at the firing of another and those on the other who seem to think NCRegister owes Shea and Fisher a writing gig in perpetuity. I thought Mark Shea was very gracious in his blog post regarding his own firing, Less so in the post about Fisher. But I get that. It sometimes easier to let it go when we are the one’s suffering rather than our friends.

You raise an excellent point about the impact of the firing. It doesn’t silence anyone. Particularly not in this age.

Indeed, letting an opinion author go as it doesn’t reflect the journal is an age old practice. I recall reading ages ago a gracious comment by the late Bill Mauldin about journals that quit running his cartoons in the late 40s and early 50s as they were not what they bargained for being right, while also thanking those that kept running them. This is just the same.

Fisher and Shea can go on writing, and likely will. In the day of electronic publishing, it isn’t as if they will now be shut up, as it might have been had there been only print Catholic journals like back in the day. Having said that, even back in the day, there were journals that were outside the mainstream.

This assumes, however, that Shea and Fisher can afford to publish without the NCR. That I have no concept of. At least one blog I saw on this suggested the NCR was Shea’s employer, but I really don’t know that. Be that as it may, the publisher always chooses who it employs.

I agree regarding Shea’s post on his termination, very gracious. I understand his being upset about Fisher’s firing, but some of his writings of late have been rather hostile and that tends towards that. Writing with hostility or sarcasm are two things which are extremely difficult to do effectively and not come across poorly, and to only your own audience, when doing. Some have suggested Shea should take a lesson from this firing and if he does one may be that he doesn’t really have that very rare ability, at least at present.

 

[steido01]

That depends on who’s paying them. It isn’t incumbent upon the National Catholic Register to provide him money and a platform to do so.

True, but it would be duplicitous for a quasi-religious publication to tolerate and profit from his style – only until it conflicted with their preferred political candidate. It sure would send mixed signals if my employer hired me for my work, profited from my work, and then one day fired me for that same work.

It’s times like these, when I see my Catholic siblings torn about how to handle such situations, that I’m thankful for the Lutheran theory of the Two Kingdoms. Mixing political and religious always gets… messy.

I wonder if Fisher and Shea hadn’t been warned by the Register that if they persisted in their vulgar speech and or vitriol that they would be removed. If so, Shea and Fisher continued at their own risk. I’d like to see a better statement from National Catholic Register before sounding off too much

This is the post of the day, and it’s something we’ll never know. Thank you.

 

[pensmama87]

Ultimately, of course it’s the Register’s right to hire and fire whoever they wish.

I object most to those who have dedicated an astonishing amount of time to vilifying two authors who have done a lot of good in spreading the Good News among people who ordinarily couldn’t give a hoot about it, and then react in glee when they have accomplished what they wish.

I will admit I am not a huge fan of Mr. Shea’s “catchphrases” when it comes to politics, but his “Greatest Catholics of All Time” expression comes to mind here. These are people who posit themselves as incredibly holy and pious, and they are publicly gleeful that two people, who weren’t exactly and have never been rich, have lost their jobs. Seriously, who does that? That’s in absolutely horrid taste.

This infighting is middle school BS. We should be careful to check even privately any elation over another’s suffering, even if we feel “they had it coming.”